Author
Topic: Equivalent to Foldershare? (Read 16597 times)

I've been a very happy user of Foldershare for quite a while. I sync about 30G of data between five PCs (and formerly a Mac) almost effortlessly. Its big limitation is that (thanks to MS buying it), it doesn't do linux.

Now I'm thinking of trying to incorporate a linux box into the mix. I'm looking for something that will do the same thing as Foldershare. I'd appreciate suggestions. Here's what my research so far seems to tell me:

- rsync and its offspring might do it but - they seem to be 2-box only and probably hard for a novice to configure

- Powerfolder looks like a candidate, but I found their documentation tough to evaluate - any users here?

- I could probably do a kluge and run a VM with windows on the linux box and thus continue foldershare, but that does not appeal at all.

The first link didn't work and the other two are essentially about selective sharing of local items with others. My sense of them was that they're about allowing others to access your files. My interest is in synchronizing large numbers of files on multiple machines, something Foldershare does extremely well, but not extending into the *nix world.

Thanks for the recommendations - I find that I'd looked at both PowerFolder and Unison before, but had forgotten them. PowerFolder indeed looks like what I want, though I'd have to ante up considerably more cash than desired to get the capabilities I need. Oh well, now it's just a matter of money.

Any experiences with some of those equivalents? I'm asking because I'm just through with FolderShare--it missed some file changes and synchronized data the opposite direction, destroying some recent changes. (Fortunately FileHamster had a copy, but this was enough to mistrust and stop using FolderShare.)

If anybody is interested in my very short experience with PowerFolder: I realized soon that for some reason it blocks Alt-PgUp and Al-PgDn shortcuts, which are inevitable for Adobe InDesign, so upon every restart I just stopped PowerFolder, saying to myself that I'll have to investigate or eventually disable it later. This repeated several times and I completely forgot about it. Needless to say that I've never synchronized a single bit using it. After today's restart this window appeared:

So I finally uninstalled it without further investigation. Would you trust such an application?

Never mind, in the meantime I humbly returned to FolderShare and I must say, except rare cut-offs, it runs quite well, synchronizing several thousands of files without any problem.

I have used PF for long time and I do not think PF deserves negative attention. However as I said before it is expensive to me. Also their online storage offer is just too expensive compared to alternatives. That could have been a nice offer 4 years ago but now it is expensive and all you get is 1 gb file storage.

There are couple good things about it thou

-It is under constant developement and you can leave feedback or ask for features in their froms. They seem to take their app serious and try to improve it as much as possible. -Cross platform, it works under any java supporting platform-You can create different profiles (more extensive than Folder share). For example you can create project (check in check out style) profile, or just download or upload etc profiles-There is no sign in, sign out like FS. This has been one issue that kept me away from FS. As long as you know ip numbers it is easy to connect. It also suppoorts custom dns names.

As far as blocking shortcuts goes I totally agree with you, it sounds like a bug thou. You might want to drop a line to the developers at least they know the issue. I know you wont use it but this can be a nice feedback to let them know.

So the free version will soon be over. I can't afford paying for this, especially when I'm almost satisfied with FolderShare.

The problem I had with FolderShare was caused by Excel, which changes the timestamp of the opened file to the current time, and changing it back again after closing it without any editing. This obviously confuses all real time synchronizers/backups/versioning systems. Anyone having an idea? This is my biggest pet peeve with Excel (at least versions 2000 and 2003).

The problem I had with FolderShare was caused by Excel, which changes the timestamp of the opened file to the current time, and changing it back again after closing it without any editing. This obviously confuses all real time synchronizers/backups/versioning systems. Anyone having an idea? This is my biggest pet peeve with Excel (at least versions 2000 and 2003).

apparently it's solved in the new file-format but that no solution for a lot of us same problem with Filehamster too - see this FH thread

I opened an xls file with Star Office & it didnt get updated by Filehamster - havent tested it beyond that because I rarely use xls files but could (possibly) be an optionI guess the only other option is to backup xls files in a different manner

It’s hard to believe only a month has gone by since we sent out our first newsletter. Summer has arrived and BBQ season is in full swing. Despite the California sun, a lot has happened over here at Syncplicity since then! Let us get you up to speed.

After three months, we’ll be shedding the Beta label and releasing a final version of Syncplicity on July 28th. It’s been a long time coming!

We unveiled our final pricing. It’s based on your feedback from one of the most hotly debated topics on our forums. We think you’ll like it.

A free version of Syncplicity will always be available! While the version has certain limits, it’s perfect for casual sync users. It lets you sync two computers and starts off with 2GB*.

The paid version is now only $9.99 a month. It lets you sync and backup as many computers as you like and starts off with 40GB. Get the details here.

You can add more space if you’d like. Refer friends and get your free account up to 5GB and your paid one up to 50GB!

Love it? Hate it? Let us know on our forums!Web apps on your desktop

And finally, our best for last. You can now open and edit files in popular web applications straight from your desktop. Scribd, Zoho, and Picnik are the perfect companions for your documents and photos!

Thanks, cpmp. You made me study in more depth the details. I managed to dig out the most important piece of information:

Free: Free forever. Allows up to two computers, 5 revisions per file or 30 days of previous revisions (whichever is less), up to 10,000 files, and 2 GB of storage. The free account expires after 60 days of inactivity.

Well, that's not bad. It depends on your type of work. I'm working with large files for professional printing bureaus, so even the paid 40 GB would be questionable, provided I could afford it.

Anyway, I realized only now that Syncplicity works completely different from FolderShare--it's a remote backup and versioning system, too! On the other hand, what I like about FolderShare is its ability to create peer to peer connection, so when I'm at home when both my laptop and desktop are connected to the same LAN, the syncing process runs at the full speed of LAN.

Although the Pro may be auto sync this version must be done manually.And of course no size limit.You have to set your syncing folders to share in order for it to work on a network.

But I do use syncplicity between two computers, cause I can.It monitors in real time any changes and it's fast, but slows if you are runnning other programs giving syncplicity a backseat to whatever you are doing. But it is still syncing till it's done. Even if the computers are shut off and back on, it will resume automatically where it left off.

Then there is XDrive from Aol that can do syncing.It's a 5gb capacity for free. Not sure about between computers though. I haven't tried it.

I'm not interested in Microsoft products for this kind of thing.Though they have them, they dump a load of extra files on your computer with their 'Live' stuff. My experience anyway.

In no way I could be considered an advocate of Microsoft products, but FolderShare does its job silently, quite reliably and nothing else. (Besides, it was not originated in Microsoft.) It lacks a lot of features, but for the price it's a real bargain.

Well FS is not ip to ip connection at first. A server is needed to route the connections, that is why you need a user name. And I personally do not like that approach. That would be the main reason why I would advocate PF over FH. On the otherhand when I have used FS for a project it was easy and seamless as you stated. I think that FS is the best if you do not want many configuration options.

In my opinion they both are good products.

-There is no sign in, sign out like FS. This has been one issue that kept me away from FS.